gravity waves found

[Harvey]

Harvey,

youre last video...in the bottom left, theres a square, brass coloured "thing"... looks like a m ounting of some kind....anyways...it was jiggling all over the place to my eyes...seemed to be somewhat in time with the revolutions..... cant determine wether it was a video codec'ing thingy....or genuinely "glimmering"...certainly looked wavery..... was it loose physically at all?

The light source for this video was at a radius about 28 inches from the center of the DUT (device under test) in the horizontal plane (x) and about 27 inches in the vertical plane (y) and about 10 inches in the depth plane (z) roughly 40 inches as a crow flys . The camera was about the same height as the light source.

The acrylic base is secured to 4 LRF's (Little Rubber Feet - as alsetalokin called them) that have a yellowish tint from the warm light provided by the incandescent lamp.

Evidently, there is some shadowing by the various PMH element elevations of that particular LRF in the lower left corner. So we are getting an effect similar to that of moving shadows on the wall projected by the changing TV image illuminating stationary objects in the room. But in this case the objects are moving and the light source is stationary.

Personally, I see more action along the left margin in that light colored cloth there. That area does not have any shadows from the PMH - but it could have reflections. Whatever it is that causes the compression algorithms to flip the pixels like that must be a subtle thing. We may be trying to dismiss this as noise, but before we do, we may want to ask ourselves - why does the noise take on this wavy pattern? Could it be that the compression algorithms are just more sensitive to some underlying pattern that is concealed in the higher definition data and by the average persons POV. If so, then it would take a trained eye - or a specific algorithm to expose the patterns. As long as this is a possibility it cannot be discounted. Therefore it will take some type of proof either way to remove it as a possibility and place it into the realm of not possible or factual. I am open to suggestions on a method or falsifying test to help solidify this possibility one way or the other.

[rave154]

Harvey,

youre last video...in the bottom left, theres a square, brass coloured "thing"... looks like a m ounting of some kind....anyways...it was jiggling all over the place to my eyes...seemed to be somewhat in time with the revolutions..... cant determine wether it was a video codec'ing thingy....or genuinely "glimmering"...certainly looked wavery..... was it loose physically at all?

[Harvey]

Hi All,

I've done the Icing without the PMH and I did a 5 hour spin to test the weather as requested - I still need to process those videos. I have also done a sequence on the melting of the previous PMH ice I hope to process, but that is a very long sequence of almost 30 minutes of bits and pieces of interrupted video and stills.

This video is the requested Tri-Pod rundown using my cell phone resolution. I will need to do another AVCHD version when I can get the time and drive space to handle those large files and borrow my son's camera again. But for now, perhaps this will do:
YouTube - Lambright - 021

[woopy]

Hi all

And here the last test with the top view. And now i can figure out how the energy looks like.

It make me think of the head of those oldtime people as king Louis 14 with giant wigs. But the face has also a bart . I name it "The PMH head"

pix 1 is a reminder of post 1610 with the side view of the pmh.

pix 2 is a reminder of post 1624 with the rear view of the pmh

pix 3 and 4 is the last setup for the top view

pix 5 is some drawings which figures the PMH head.

to be simple it seems to me, that the PMH looks like a face looking at the "contraction area, and the hairs represents the expension area. (or perhaps it is the contrary ) The bart represents the "tunnel of post 1610.But this tunnel seems to be flat on the front and round on the rear (post 1624)

what do you think ?



@ Harvey

nice pix , of course you should ice the pirex without the PMH to see the difference. Great work

good luck at all

Laurent

[Harvey]

vids and pics

Hi All,

Here are the videos and pictures.

First, Does PMH Ice Float?

Recall that I used the bump for my ice cube test:
Zoom

YouTube - Lambright - 018

===================================

Video Before the Still Shots:YouTube - Lambright -019

Next the Re-Freeze with the cover on:
<Zoom <Zoom <Zoom
You can see the PMH under the clear water

<Zoom <Zoom <Zoom

<Zoom <Zoom <Zoom
Trails have large Bubbles at one end, on the bottom of the melt (or freeze)

Video After the Still Shots:YouTube - Lambright - 020

Cheers!


p.s. @ Aromaz - I remember this from Science class in the '70's regarding hot water - at that time there was some hypothesis regarding organisms that cannot live in water above boiling point that were killed in the hot water, but lived in the cold water keeping it from freezing. Personally I think it has more to do with crystal stoichiometry and preferred lattice frequencies where the warmer water give better alignment. You can think of it as a form of annealing water. Because the strands stay more flexible for a longer period, the crystal alignment occurs faster and the better the alignment the better the thermal conductivity. Where strands freeze quickly as individuals, they prohibit the proper structuring of the whole and prolong the group freezing of the lattice until all the energy is properly propagated. So the cold water would also lead to a less clear product.

One thing is interesting though in that link regarding boiling the water - it helps to remove the dissolved gases. So if we boiled our water, it may cause our bubbles to disappear.

[Aromaz]

Water is a very interesting paradox. It reacts like no other molecule or material.

Water expands during freezing (clean distilled water expands by 9%). Normally freezes from outside into center. Progresivly as the first layers on outside freezes - it expands, thus replacing water towards the center - causing the familiar hump. The downwards slope in 'bubbles' are because of thermal flow - cooler water down and taking longer to freeze.

These experiments might be usefull as measuring kind of device for energy we cannot measure in any other way.

Have a look at the Mpemba effect:
Mpemba effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Harvey]

Reversed Thinking

I just took a video of my freezer ice with my cell phone - but I need to take some stills also before I get it all processed.

Even with the cover, the ice did bulge up in the middle. After reading Laurent's post about the ice freezing around the edges first it got me thinking that the ice probably does just that - freezes from the outside toward the middle rather than from the center outward. This would explain why the center is bulged. As long as the ice can expand inward toward the center, it does not need to expand upward out of the dish as much. But once it reaches the middle, it has nowhere to go but up so the pressure increases.

This means that there is a point at which the dissolved gases come out of the water early as bubbles and then are extruded toward the center along the freeze zone. But the spacing and distribution are still puzzling. It seems somewhat sparse and random but it definitely has a symmetry to it - in other words, the tracks are not lopsided to one area, or grouped with more in one place than another. The distribution seems even and random.

But here is another question: If the bubbles begin at the outer edges and get pushed to the center, then why do they get pushed downwards as well? Could it be instead that as the freeze moves toward the center, there are pockets of unfrozen water (kept warmer by some energy) that the bubbles follow outward? So we have tunnels of water remaining liquid for a long period during the freezing - or perhaps the dissolved gases when they expand, take heat with them and that in turn melts the ice around them giving them a pathway. Is it pressure driven?

Only a freeze test with no PMH in place will help us to see if this is the case. So there will need to be another experiment without the PMH for comparison. If the streaks are caused by the PMH, then they will either go away or will become like those in my ice cube video linked to in my next post.

[woopy]

hi all

another great day of experience today

the pix shows where the energy goes. Seems to be regular. Notice the center dark cylinder which is very concentrated, that is clear ice, which correspond on the the pix of my previous post (at 90 degrees)

And now i am freezing the third Dimension with the pmh vertical and flip upwards. so i will get the real 3D image in about 15 hours of patience

My idea is that the pmh have influence exactly when the water change is state i mean when freezing. So if the water is liquid no effect if the water is iced no effect. But when the water became ice than the pmh is fully and powerfully acting.

I mean this morning at 8 oclock when i go to the freezer , the water was iced about everywhere around in the container but not in the center . At this point the surface was slightly up curved and after some more hours the center water ices and raise the already iced surface,very strongly (pix 2 to 5)

But what is important in my eyes, is that the center ice is full of air bubbles. And it seems that these bubbles are oriented.
I mean the pmh is vibrating the water az the point of icing ,so the icing cannot occur correctly and further more the pmh give a direction of the icing.

When i cut the bloc in 2 parts , i could mecanically destroy the bubbled ice very easily.

And the transparent ice is very strong.

So if the pmh act on the changing state of water , why not try on boilling water. (my first try are not very impressive so i will report later )



And last for David, i took a lot of the transparent ice every where in the bloc,

but it perform as normal ice, and float very nicely without sinking

good luck at all

Laurent

[Jetijs]

David, nothing in the mail yet, will probably be a few more days

[david lambright]

hi...

i am not too good at moving posts from one forum to another.....yes it was laurent asking about the tripod ....i was trying to post some of her results at OU....awesome stuff that should be shared.....jet, did it get there yet?...david

[Harvey]

@jet...did you get the mail [email protected] you figured out what is causing the pixelation if the camera/object is not moving?...have you noticed anything odd about the auto focus when shooting video?....david

I could set focus to manual.

That section, I think was caused by the compression algorithms, but it is curious as to why the algorithm shifts the stuff around like that - it is one thing to change the pixel shading and quite another to shift the boundaries of the objects in the shot. It's strange, but it was done with a low res cell phone camera, converted with SUPER program and then uploaded and processed again on you-tube so it went through a few stages. I don't see that stuff on the HD shots.

But it makes me wonder if there is some nuance there that the algorithms are bordering and some people can pick up on that. It is like that link Sucahyo gave above. That one experiment that Mr. Land did was interesting, taking two Black and White shots of a color image from different angles and then projecting one through a green lens and the other direct and getting a color image - weird.

BTW - some of the posts you copy from here to OU seem to lose the authors name that wrote them - someone told me that you were asking me on OU to use a tripod, but that was really Laurent asking here IIRC, right?

Cheers!

[david lambright]

hi everyone...

@jet...did you get the mail [email protected] you figured out what is causing the pixelation if the camera/object is not moving?...have you noticed anything odd about the auto focus when shooting video?....david

[Loadstone]

Hey Harvey.
Nice post about the optical effects.

The "floaters" move with the eye yes. They look like chains of beads or single beads and they have a dark rim and sometimes a dark spot in the middle.

If you put the beads in the foreground and focus behind them, then you will see the little shiny thing moving all around. They all seem to have a pulse that is about 1.5 times a second, although they are all moving about in every direction. It's hard to tell if the shiny things are on the eye because they pop in and out of vision.
If you can put the shiny things in the foreground and look behind them, then you will see that the background is "boiling" like a gasseous medium.

If I look at an object I can see it with each eye individually, but as you stated sometimes one side disappears, but I can make it so that I can see 2 of the object about an inch apart. If I try to go more than that I loose it.

Ed wrote about it because the magnets travel with the light and the eyes are sending and receiving.
Plus he wrote "An educated person is one who's senses are refined"

[Harvey]

have you tried to see if you could get the ice to sink..yet?...does the ice right around the PMH have different properties?... just a couple of Qs.....david

Good question. Just by chance, I had removed the ice bulge from my melt and kept it separate (it was the last thing to melt). So, after reading here, I added some red food coloring to it and then spooned a couple spoonfuls of that water into a clear glass of distilled water to see what would happen. I filmed the experiment and will post a link here in this post when I get done processing the video. YouTube - Lambright - 017

I used the remainder of the dyed water to make four ice cubes - well actually I just put them in the freezer a few minutes ago, so technically I am 'making' four ice cubes. We will see if they float or sink after they are frozen. The ice tray is positioned about 3 inches above and about 3 inches to the side of the PMH - so it will be interesting also if any bubble formations occur in those.

Additionally, I have started my second test using a cover over the Pyrex dish. I added some fresh distilled water to compensate for the ice bulge that I had removed (and I spilled some too ). Also, just for grins, I gave the water a good healthy clockwise spin after positioning the Pyrex dish over the PMH - mainly to get any air bubbles out that may have stuck to the glass, but also to see if somehow it causes any curved tracks (since all of the others were straight radially from the center, but some were curved upwards as if gravity took over after they started.

My son's hypothesis is that the bubbles are caused by dissolved gasses in the water that do not freeze with the water and they are pushed outward away from the freeze zone which occurs at the center first. I am keeping some reservations against that theory because it would imply that the dissolved gasses are following those radial lines before the freeze begins and it does not explain the slow lateral direction which changes to a vertical direction - unless more gas is picked up along the way and the bubble becomes more buoyant as it increases in size.

LOL - seems the deeper we investigate this thing the more questions we have

[woopy]

hi David

If i understand you right the question is

if i extract , of the pmh ice. a piece of the contracted area and put it in tapwater is it sinking ?

wooww? very good idea

i am now icing a new test with vertical pmh (exactly same set up as today but verticaly ) the aim is to try to get a 3D image of the flux as described on my previous post.

but if i can, (surely not so easy ) i will extract a contracted ice area to see if the density is higher than water (idest more than one)

am i correct ?

very exciting thread here

good luck at all

Laurent